Reply to: Would You Trust an Agent Who Doesn't Reveal His Markup?

[Bluebird]

I've in the past seen a job I quite liked the look of, then approached an agency who I've used in the past to see if I can get the gig via them rather than the agency thats advertising the post.

[senditback]

The solution is clear: let the free market decide.

Specifically: as a contractor, if you like a particular contract, take it from the agency that will give you the best deal. Don't accept that the first agency to get to you with a particular client has exclusive rights to that deal.

I'm interested in opinions on this. I wouldn't try to cut out an agent from something he brought to me: but if Agent A comes to me about a contract, then later that same day, Agent B comes to me about the same contract, am I morally obliged to say to B, "sorry, I have already been contacted about this one"?

I actually did that yesterday, then asked myself if there was really any reason why I should. I wouldn't be not cheating on Agent A, just considering different offers.

It depends on whether the first agency has forwarded your CV to the client. If they have then you should really stick with them, otherwise it can get messy with duplicate CVs going to the client. That can really pi's them off. If the have not forwarded the CV thenit's free game. Having said that it is worth bearnig in mind who the two agents are - if you know one to be better than the other then probably stick with them anyhow as they have more chance of getting you the gig.

[Euro-commuter]

The difference is that agencts "could" lose you the gig based solely on THEIR mark-up not your rate.
The client may pay the higher rate, but it does put you at a disadvatage IF an agency tries to squeese too much out of the client.

After all if they get 50% of their clients to pay way over the odds as opposed to 100% paying a reasonable rate - the agency doesn't lose out - the only ones who lose are the 50% who weren't taken on...

The solution is clear: let the free market decide.

Specifically: as a contractor, if you like a particular contract, take it from the agency that will give you the best deal. Don't accept that the first agency to get to you with a particular client has exclusive rights to that deal.

I'm interested in opinions on this. I wouldn't try to cut out an agent from something he brought to me: but if Agent A comes to me about a contract, then later that same day, Agent B comes to me about the same contract, am I morally obliged to say to B, "sorry, I have already been contacted about this one"?

I actually did that yesterday, then asked myself if there was really any reason why I should. I wouldn't be not cheating on Agent A, just considering different offers.

[cykophysh39]

I can't believe you actuallyh used the words trust and agent in the same sentence!!!

[Bluebird]

DA can you get me a gig for £800 a day ?

ta.

[DodgyAgent]

surely you should do the best job you can - not base your input on your rate.

i do agree that if the cleint is paying x they expect to know what calibre of contractor they should be getting.

but that is down to the pimp - if they are going to **** around then they will get less business and therefore not pick up many contracts.

but if the agency are providing profesional recruitment services then as long as they fulfill the clients requirments with the correct person then all is ok.

there is a point that whilst maybe it is not for the contractor to know the markup the end client should certainly know what is being paid to the contractor and thus what the agency is making.

It is nothing to do with doing your best. Some people are better than others, if someone commands a regular tab of £800 a day then they are more than likeley to have more experience of doing harder jobs better than someone on £400 a day.

[DodgyAgent]

nope sorry no great ideas for cutting pimps out of the loop!!!

I think the whole contractor agency end client set up needs to be reveiwed so there is more confidence across the whole industry

why dont you just leave it to the market to decide. In the world of non joined up thinking who on earth "reviews" the market?

[BOBJ]

To go off at a slight tangent, my idiot agent copied me in on some internal stuff, which included the total amount my client was paying. From this I have worked out their cut is in the region of 7%. I was expecting more like double this....anyone ever seen anything as low as this, bear in mind the client is massive and the agent is their favourite preferred supplier.

[abc]

nope sorry no great ideas for cutting pimps out of the loop!!!

I think the whole contractor agency end client set up needs to be reveiwed so there is more confidence across the whole industry

Maybe if enough people asked, we could get the people running jobserve to transform themselves into a fixed/low margin, completely transparent agency.

Or perhaps I'm dreaming.

[jh0711]

nope sorry no great ideas for cutting pimps out of the loop!!!

I think the whole contractor agency end client set up needs to be reveiwed so there is more confidence across the whole industry

[abc]

i suppose on reflection you could argue that if you are represetning yourself as a business (e.g through your ltd company) then you have a b2b contract with the agency and the agency has a b2b contract with the end client.

give that situation would you normally expect a transparecny of fees/margins/profits etc between all parties?

Yes of course I would like the transparency to be there.

The "snippet" at the very top of the thread shows what can happen when it is absent.

In terms of how I represent myself, well I am "just" a programmer.
Unfortunately, to make reasonable money doing this, the tax system forces me to use a Ltd Company. That is as far an my interest in business goes. My main interest is in programming.

It would be nice to be able to do it without the greedy agents getting in the way.

The other ("non greedy") agents do me a valuable service in finding work, so I've no problem with them at all.

[abc]

well easy answer do not use pimps get your own gigs..........

Yes that would be ideal, but just try calling some bank and asking for a direct freelance gig.

HR departments being as they are it would be a short conversation (I think).

Perhaps you know better. If so, I am all ears!

[abc]

surely you should do the best job you can - not base your input on your rate.

i do agree that if the cleint is paying x they expect to know what calibre of contractor they should be getting.

but that is down to the pimp - if they are going to **** around then they will get less business and therefore not pick up many contracts.

but if the agency are providing profesional recruitment services then as long as they fulfill the clients requirments with the correct person then all is ok.

there is a point that whilst maybe it is not for the contractor to know the markup the end client should certainly know what is being paid to the contractor and thus what the agency is making.

I do the best job I can.

But the client sets the tasks and the deadlines for completion.

If I am given six months work to do in three months (which happens), I do my best.

But if I was given such a heavy work load AND ended up with a shorter contract, just because of agency greed, then I don't like that.

[jh0711]

i suppose on reflection you could argue that if you are represetning yourself as a business (e.g through your ltd company) then you have a b2b contract with the agency and the agency has a b2b contract with the end client.

give that situation would you normally expect a transparecny of fees/margins/profits etc between all parties?

[abc]

Boll***.The dynamics are totally different. If you are charging the contractor out at £1000 a day the client will expect an £800 a day contractor. If you are paying a contractor £500 a day then the client will be expecting more from his contractor. If the client is happy with the deal then fine.

From a contractor point of view it helps to know where he is positioned in terms of cost to the client.

Yes that is correct. I would like to know the client's view of me.

On one of my past contracts, I detected a certain amount of, shall we say, "twitchiness" from the client, because of the rate having been pushed beyond the limit that they would have ideally liked to pay.

I then had to live with a difficult attitude (the "rich contractor" thing) for three months. So it had a long term negative effect on my well being at work.

The question that was in my mind on that gig was, was the rate pushed up in order to put more money in my pocket, (in which case, to be fair, the agent kind of did a good job) or was the rate pushed that far to put more in the agents pocket?

I am the one that has to be present on site and satisfy the client’s expectations, which will be higher if they are paying more for me.

Perhaps I will be given a heavier work load, or a perhaps a tighter deadline, or both, as a result of the client expecting more.